[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
Some here seem to forget theat the terrrosit's threaten to blow up the building, what other choice did Russia have?
[/QUOTE]
All I can say is thank GOD they didn't blow up the building even though they could have at any time. In the end it was use of toxic gas which killed those theatre goers and russia should have no hesitancy in coming clean which agent was used as they feel that their action was justified.
Probably the best description for those poor victims is collateral damage.
That is what I asked. So you are saying that usage of WMDs and biological/chemical weapons IS justified in certain situations, like this theater saga, where terrorists threatened to blow up the entire building?
I dont see why the kurd butcher Saddam Hussain cant use the same analogy to justify his gassing of the Kurds, which, funnily enough, was approved/ignored/allowed-to-happen by the US back in the 80s. Kurds staged a revolt, and according to Saddam, they were terrorists, enemies of the state.
Now the plot seems to be thickening. Russian President Putin just today announced granting extra powers to his military (as if they didnt have enough already). He has also announced that Russia will attack terrorists at home and abroad. Now we have two power houses of the world raring to wreak havoc on the civilian population of the world, since they dont know squat about who their target is, or how to strike it.
Welcome to hell.
[/QUOTE]
Akif if your going to compare what happen in Moscow with what Saddam did to the Kurds then I question your intelligence. You expect the U.S. and Russia to get attack and then bitch when they respond.
Judge, apparently the Russians were conducting a risky test of a previously undisclosed chemical agent that ended with disastrously unintended consequences.
The light gray gas filtered down like a mist in the theater hall before sunrise on Saturday, and the effect on hostages and hostage-takers alike was nearly instant. Most simply lost consciousness, as their breath and blood slowed and Russian security troops began to surge through the theater. Some of Russia’s top health officials said tonight that the gas was a nonlethal anesthetic, like the ones used in general surgery. But in the chaos of a predawn commando operation against heavily armed guerrillas, the result was all too lethal. Of the 117 hostages confirmed dead so far, all but one appear to have died from the effects of the gas, according to the Health Committee of Moscow. ***What unfolded in the theater appears to have amounted to a risky test of a previously undisclosed chemical agent that ended with disastrously unintended consequences. *** Andrei P. Seltovsky, the chairman of the health committee, said tonight that he did not even know the name of the gas, parrying questions toward what he called the “competent authorities,” strongly suggesting that the gas was developed by the military or security forces as part of some secret program. More than a day and a half after the raid, officials refused either to confirm that or to identify the gas, rebuffing even a direct request from the United States Embassy. Experts in Russia and the United States said that its use — and the official silence enveloping it — were raising troubling questions about Russia’s compliance with the international treaty banning chemical weapons. Lev A. Fyodorov, who once worked in the Soviet chemical weapons agency and is now the president of the Social and Ecological Union for Chemical Safety, said the gas appeared to be a Valium-based agent developed for the military during the Soviet era, and still a state secret. Vil S. Mirzayanov, a former colleague of Mr. Fyodorov’s at the chemical weapons agency who was twice imprisoned for reporting in 1991 that the Soviet Union had continued to develop and test chemical weapons after publicly denouncing them, said that in 1988 the agency had altered the molecular structure of an incapacitating agent, BZ, which the United States studied extensively in the 1960’s.
The agency — known as the State Scientific and Research Institute of Organic Chemistry and Technology — discovered that the new substance proved to be an effective anesthetic after tests at Moscow’s main military hospital, Mr. Mirzayanov said in an interview tonight. Neither he nor Mr. Fyodorov could say definitively what type of gas was used, however, based on the limited information released. They and others said it was possible it would fall into a gray area in the chemical weapons treaty. The treaty, which Russia has signed and ratified, bans all forms of lethal gas and strictly monitors dozens of chemical components that can be used to make them. It does allow the use of some chemical agents, like tear gas, for “law enforcement, including domestic riot control.” At the same time, however, it explicitly requires that such agents have effects that “disappear within a short time following termination of exposure.” The experts said the mounting death toll — along with the fact that hundreds remain hospitalized, many in grave condition — was evidence enough that the effects were anything but short term. Mr. Mirzayanov said that at a minimum, the use of the gas violated the treaty’s spirit. He said anesthetic gases were extremely difficult to use, requiring precise concentrations to prevent overdoses. Having commandos pump gas into an open theater, filled with people of varying ages and physical conditions, was comparable, he said, to having an amateur administer anesthesia to a patient. “It may be less a crime than taking hostages,” he said in a telephone interview from New Jersey, where he lives and works as a consultant, “but it is also a crime to use this in this way.” Mr. Fyodorov, by contrast, said he believed the agent was not one prohibited by the treaty. He said other countries, including the United States, continued to research similar nonlethal agents.
According to survivors and health officials, none of the victims suffered the sorts of blistering, convulsions or internal bleeding associated with the most lethal chemical weapons, like VX or sarin, which are prohibited. The health officials said the stress of 57 hours of captivity, along with hunger and poor sanitary conditions, compounded the effects. Echoing the statements of doctors who treated the victims, Mr. Fyodorov said the deaths appeared to result directly from poisoning from overexposure, with symptoms including breathing disorders, loss of blood pressure and shock to the heart, liver and kidneys. “This weapon was developed to be used on healthy men who serve in the army,” he said, explaining why so many died. “It was used here on some of the so-called risk groups — women, children, people with liver and kidney problems.” ***Amy E. Smithson, an expert in chemical weapons at the Henry L. Stimson Center, an arms research organization in Washington, said the official explanations of the gas left many unanswered questions about Russia’s compliance with the treaty, including whether the military had developed the gas and the method in which it was used. “This is kind of like pornography: you know it when you see it,” she said of the gray areas in the treaty. “***There are going to be people on both sides who will argue that the treaty does not prohibit it. But how it was used, I think, is going to make it a huge debate.”
The mysterious gas Russian forces pumped into a theater to end a hostage crisis was an opiate — a chemical related to morphine, Pentatgon officials said Monday.
The Bush administration, meanwhile, refused to criticize Russian special forces for using the gas, which killed 116 of the hostages as well as the hostage takers.
“The president abhors the loss of life, but he understands that it is the terrorists” who are responsible for the tragedy, Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer (news - web sites) said Monday as the president traveled to New Mexico.
Military officials said the U.S. embassy in Moscow had determined that the gas used by the Russians was some sort of opium derivative. Such substances not only kill pain and dull the senses but also can cause coma and death by shutting down breathing and circulation.
Russian authorities have refused to name the substance used, even keeping that information from doctors treating the rescued hostages.
Fleischer did not endorse the tactic in remarks to reporters as Bush flew from Cabo San Lucas, Mexico, to Phoenix, then from Arizona to New Mexico. But he made clear the administration’s view that blame for the deaths lay with the captors.
Asked directly about the use of the gas, Fleischer wouldn’t say whether the administration believed it was appropriate. “We don’t know what all the facts are,” he said.
But, he said, “As that information is developed, the president feels very strongly that the people who caused this are the terrorists.”
*Russian authorities have refused to name the substance used, even keeping that information from doctors treating the rescued hostages. *
[/QUOTE]
Yet still we have the governments of the west defending and justifying Russia's use of chemical and poison gas on its own people. I guess you have just answered Akif's question?
Yet still we have the governments of the west defending and justifying Russia's use of chemical and poison gas on its own people. I guess you have just answered Akif's question?
[/QUOTE]
I never said I supported the way Russia has handled the aftermath of the situation, it mirrors how they were after the submarine Kursk sank. But when you are told by a group of terrorists saying we will blow up this building you need to take action and any action would have cost lives, the opium gas may have very well saved hundreds of lives. An investigation is needed and will come.
All speculation as to what they might have done, which is easy to do when you yourself have just chemically gassed to death those same hostages. The Chechens don’t have a proven history of blowing up large civilian buildings, with so many people in. But the Russians do:-
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
Akif if your going to compare what happen in Moscow with what Saddam did to the Kurds then I question your intelligence. You expect the U.S. and Russia to get attack and then bitch when they respond.
[/QUOTE]
If you wish to hide your baseless answer behind a personal remark targetting my intelligence, go ahead.
My question still remains unanswered, even though I know what it is.
For you, its right when you do it. Its wrong when they do it.
Russia was an arch enemy till 12 years ago, and ever since they started towing the US line, their actions have become justifiable to you. Same with Iraq. Their actions were justifiable back then, but now, they are your foes, so all of a sudden they are terrorists.
Why dont you just hang a huge sign saying, Hypocisy, and that will make it so much easier to understand this argument of yours that justifies what clearly has been an illegitimate way of getting things done by the Russians. They gassed to death more than a 100 civilians. There is no sweet way to say that.
I’ve seen an article that states the Jews were behind the WTC attack as well, what’s your point?
You and many others question the proof that has linked Bin Laden to the WTC attacks yet when a book comes out that states something you would like to think is true or belittles those you oppose you thow your ‘faith’ behide it?
According to at least one Russian hostage speaking to a British newspaper (the Russian being the theatre’s senior producer), the Russians were not faced with a ‘now or never’ situation in which Russian authorities were left with no choice but to step in at the point that the Chechen rebels had threatened to blow up all the hostages.
"Giorgi Vasiliev, a senior producer at the theatre who became the main linkman between the Chechens and the authorities, gave the Guardian a very different version of events from that given by the authorities the night before. They had said the gas was used at 5.30am on Saturday because the gunmen had started shooting hostages, leaving the authorities with no alternative but to storm the building. But Mr Vasiliev, whose account tallied with that of many witnesses, said two hostages had been shot at 3am.
…]The main assault at the front came 15 minutes later. Mr Vasiliev’s account will leave Russian authorities open to charges of a cover-up. They had tried to justify their use of the gas as a measure of last resort in the face of the impending execution of hostages."
I dont know whats worse...the fact that they gassed these people, or the fact that they refuse to even tell doctors about what it was.....information that could be vital in saving peoples lives.
I've seen an article that states the Jews were behind the WTC attack as well, what's your point?
[/QUOTE]
Read the article - its not a Chechen claining it, but a Russian who worked for the FSB, and it mentions the same widespread suspicions among the Russian public. Further did you know that Russis never tried any Chechens for those attacks, and the cases remain open?
Russia blows up apartment buildings killing hundreds of its own civilians, and then blames the Chechens. It then chemically gasses its own people and then blames the Chechens again? And you are defending these actions, quite like your government 'defended' or concealed similar actions by your buddy of the 80's - Saddam.
Do you have any evidence other then that book you stated above that Russia blew up an apt. building?? Why are you taking the word of Aleksander Litvinenko and Yurii Felshtinskii?
According to at least one Russian hostage speaking to a British newspaper (the Russian being the theatre's senior producer), the Russians were not faced with a 'now or never' situation in which Russian authorities were left with no choice but to step in at the point that the Chechen rebels had threatened to blow up all the hostages.
[/QUOTE]
Its clear that Russian government panicked, and is now telling lies to cover up this mass terror attack. On top of that they are covering up the fact they may have tested of a previously undisclosed chemical weapon, probably in violation of international statutes.
Why is Russia not even telling the Russian doctors what chemical weapons they used, so that critical survivors can be treated accordingly?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
Malik73,
Do you have any evidence other then that book you stated above that Russia blew up an apt. building?? Why are you taking the word of Aleksander Litvinenko and Yurii Felshtinskii?
[/QUOTE]
You tell me if any Chechen has ever been charged with those apartment attacks, to this day?
Are Aleksander Litvinenko and Yurii Felshtinskii Chechens or Muslims?
How convenient it is to pick and choose which reports one believes are facts and which ones are false. There is not proof to say definitively that Russia blew up the apartment buildings.
Looks like Russia could have chosen a better method to spare as many innocent lives as possible, but the fact remains that the hostage-takers were murdering terrorists that threatened to kill more. They needed to be taken out before they killed all 700.